Casterbridge Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. The service had implemented monitoring processes to protect people from avoidable harm these had been sustained and embedded. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Accidents, incidents and events were recorded. The registered manager was informed of each incident and undertook reviews to identify trends. The registered manager had oversight and took action to prevent recurrence. Lessons learnt were shared in team meetings, supervisions and where appropriate, with people and their relatives.
 

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

People’s care needs were detailed within their support plans and risk assessments on the electronic system. Information was shared appropriately with other services; a visiting health and social care professional told us, “I've seen the improvements, staff are prompt and everyone from the management team to the carers know all about the people they care for.”
 

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People and their relatives told us they were safe at Casterbridge Lodge. A person said, “I know I am safe here as they have all the procedures, I know where the fire doors are and the exit.” A relative told us, “There's nothing wrong with the care here. I feel good and confident about all the staff so I know I can leave my loved one in their care.”

Staff confidently told inspectors what immediate action they could take to keep people safe from abuse and neglect. Staff unanimously agreed the registered manager would take any concerns raised seriously and confirmed they had received training in the different types of abuse.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Accidents, incidents and events were recorded. The registered manager was informed of each incident and undertook reviews to identify trends. The registered manager had oversight and took action to prevent recurrence. Lessons learnt were shared in team meetings, supervisions and where appropriate, with people and their relatives.
 

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Improvements had been made to the environment, with a focus on helping people living with dementia orientate themselves. Least restrictive practice was observed for people who chose to smoke, to ensure they knew door codes and were able to access the smoking area freely. A person told us, “To keep everyone safe, I can’t tell you the door code because we’ve not met before.” People looked relaxed and at ease when supported by staff with transfers, using equipment safely.

Staff understood and followed the service’s health and safety procedures. The registered manager undertook health and safety audits and ensured any areas for action were addressed.
 

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

Staff received the training and support to ensure they could carry out their role. Staff told us they felt supported fully by the registered manager. Comments from staff included, “I love my job, feel supported by management both professionally and personally” and “I am very proud of the opportunity I have been given to step up and take on a more senior role. I do this with the full support of the team and have had additional training arranged by the registered manager.”

The service had effective processes in place to ensure staff had the necessary skills and competence to carry out their roles. Recruitment records showed staff were recruited safely. This included an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.
 

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

People and their relatives told us the service was clean and tidy. The provider’s infection prevention and control policy was in date. Staff confirmed they knew their responsibilities relating to the upkeep of the service. They explained the importance of keeping the service clean to prevent the spread of infection or ill health.
 

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Medicines were ordered, stored, and disposed of securely. Stock of medicines were managed safely, in line with the provider’s medicines policy.
When medicines were prescribed to be taken ‘when required’ there were detailed and person-centred protocols in place to guide staff when these might be needed.

Staff told us that they felt well supported with medicines, and they knew how to report any issues. They told us they had training, and competency checks to make sure they gave medicines safely.